Kentmere films?

[MartinP]

An idea for the OP... In order to check the actual film-base colour, perhaps you could fix out a scrap of the undeveloped Kentmere 400. Is there a leader trimmed off for loading in the reel, or a centimetre of film still on the cassette core ? Compare the base colour of the fixed-but-undeveloped film with your developed film as a further reference.

 

[piu58]

> less "sparkle" than HP5+, but the dull look may be down to development rather than the emulsion


I used that film regularely, and I find it to be of high quality. It works well with Rodinal, grain ist not too much, tone spearation is good.

 

[Xmas]

Two points

Agfa changed Rodinal (reportedly) around 2000 to a recipe including KBr and the pre WWII Rodinal was more/less concentrated...

So the 'paraaminophenols' are not all the same the KBr may have been to reduce fog or to allow a cheaper cocktail

base fog and base colour are different animals - base colour is dye, base fog is silver and slows the effective ISO if it is uniform but if it is not uniform it shows on prints

if you are doing mono slides you need a neutral base film

 

[MartinP]

base fog and base colour are different animals - base colour is dye, base fog is silver

Absolutely so, and if we can get the poster to check the fixed-out base and compare it to the base of the developed negatives we can be more sure of what (s)he is actually seeing.

 

[dorff]

Two points

Agfa changed Rodinal (reportedly) around 2000 to a recipe including KBr and the pre WWII Rodinal was more/less concentrated...

So the 'paraaminophenols' are not all the same the KBr may have been to reduce fog or to allow a cheaper cocktail

base fog and base colour are different animals - base colour is dye, base fog is silver and slows the effective ISO if it is uniform but if it is not uniform it shows on prints

if you are doing mono slides you need a neutral base film

When I compare unexposed fixed K 400 with HP5+, for instance, the HP5+ is clear whereas the K 400 is very slightly "milky". It makes no difference to prints or scans, but I suppose HP5+ would be a better choice for mono slides then. Compared to something like Foma, the milkiness of Kentmere is negligible, of course.

 

[Gabino]

> less "sparkle" than HP5+, but the dull look may be down to development rather than the emulsion


I used that film regularely, and I find it to be of high quality. It works well with Rodinal, grain ist not too much, tone spearation is good.

Hi Uwe - what development times do you use with Rodinal for Kent400 or K100? I know this typically requires some testing, but at least I need a starting point for Rodinal and Xtol which also have available.
thanks for comments..
Gabriel

 

[piu58]

> times do you use with Rodinal for Kent400 or K100

I uses Rodinal always at 16° C for finer grain.
K400: 1+25, 13 mins
K100: I did not use until now.

 

[marcmarc]

I gave Kentmere 100 a try a couple years back. I used Rodinal 1+100 as a developer. I liked it; printed full frame it enlarged quite nice on 11x14 paper. Now that it appears that the 2+1 box of FP4 is sold out and discontinued I will switch to Kentmere 100 as my "go to" film in 135.

 

[chip j]

Mr. Galley, I read that Kentmere has less silver in it than other Ilford B&W films?

 

[Simon R Galley]

KENTMERE film is an excellent film, with a conventional emulsion that performs extremely well, but it is NOT an ILFORD film.

Also, do not get hung up about silver in 'any' film, how it is used is more more important than how much is in.

The 'silver rich' myth is just that, a myth.

Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited.

 

[Xmas]

Hi Uwe - what development times do you use with Rodinal for Kent400 or K100? I know this typically requires some testing, but at least I need a starting point for Rodinal and Xtol which also have available.
thanks for comments..
Gabriel

Rodinal
1:100 20C 60 mins stand either film

 

[AgX]

The 'silver rich' myth is just that, a myth.

Good Point.